1 2026:CGHC:26454-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3214 of 2026 Moses Logan S/o D.R. Logan Aged About 56 Years R/o C/14, Housing Board Ward No.16, Industrial Estate, Bhilai Durg C.G. 490026. ... Petitioner versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- The Principal Secretary Law And Legislative Affairs Department, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar, Raipur, C.G. 492002 ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Aman Prasad, Advocate (through VC) For State/Respondent : Mr. Vivek Sharma, Advocate General assisted by Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 30.06.2026 1. Heard Mr. Aman Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner through video conferencing as well as Mr. Vivek Sharma, learned Advocate General assisted by Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the State/respondent. ANURADHA TIWARI Digitally signed by ANURADHA TIWARI Date: 2026.07.01 10:21:37 +0530 2 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:- “A. Issue an ex parte ad interim stay of the operation, commencement, and enforcement of the Chhattisgarh Dharma SwatantryaAct 2026, in its entirety, pending service of notice and hearing of this Application. B. Grant such other and further relief as this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 3. Learned Advocate General appearing for the State submits that the issue involved in the present writ petition is no longer res integra inasmuch as similar writ petitions, namely W.P.(C) No.1960 of 2026 and W.P.(C) No.2321 of 2026, raising identical questions, have already been dismissed by this Court as being premature vide orders dated 24.04.2026 and 08.05.2026, respectively. It is, therefore, submitted that the present writ petition also deserves to be dismissed on the same ground as being premature. 4. At the outset, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the present writ petition. 5. Learned Advocate General appearing for the State fairly submits that he has no objection if the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the present writ petition. 6. In view of the statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner and there being no objection on behalf of the 3 State/respondent, the prayer is allowed. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn without any liberty. 7. Since the writ petition has been permitted to be withdrawn at the threshold, this Court deems it appropriate to waive the defects as pointed out by the Registry. Accordingly, all such defects stand waived off. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Anu